Breaking! Judge rules Trump protected by presidential immunity for claims doubting election while in office

I didnt.

1638725466237-png.572103

Is it not against the law to take a photo of your completed ballot in your state?
 
Because the case is a state level case along with the judge. A judge from Georgia does not have to abide by a ruling of a state judge in a different state.
So the judge in GA. has no knowledge of a president's protections. He or she better bone up.
 
No he isn't. If your saying something that you know to be false, that causes damages to another individual you aren't protected under the first amendment. Just ask Fox News.

Not quite.

What you are referring to is slander and libel, and that required 3 parties.
It is where you tell party A that party B did something they did not do, in order to get party A to illegally harm party B, and that is libel or slander.
Party B has to be innocent and yet still harmed without having done anything.

If you tell someone something you know to be false, like to make money investing in bitcoin, that is not illegal even if it causes them harm.
That is because you did not make them do it, and it was still their choice.
 
The 1st doesn’t protect against all speech… liable is an example
As I already said, liable is extremely difficult to prosecute because of the high standards. In this case, there is no judge that would let a liberal jury convict on this. Don't get me wrong. Democrats are dumb enough to try because they weaponized politics. Funny to watch Democrats and their media when Biden is now on the hot seat. Everything Democrats tried against Trump is now starting to be used against Biden and they call foul. Funny as heck! What goes around comes around.
 
A big win for Trump. With this ruling setting precedent, you can kiss the Georgia case by Fanni Willis goodbye. Trump did nothing wrong in that case.



"Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge"

:auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:

Did they get Mickey Mouse's opinion as well?
 
Not quite.

What you are referring to is slander and libel, and that required 3 parties.
It is where you tell party A that party B did something they did not do, in order to get party A to illegally harm party B, and that is libel or slander.
Party B has to be innocent and yet still harmed without having done anything.

If you tell someone something you know to be false, like to make money investing in bitcoin, that is not illegal even if it causes them harm.
That is because you did not make them do it, and it was still their choice.
point taken
 
As I already said, liable is extremely difficult to prosecute because of the high standards. In this case, there is no judge that would let a liberal jury convict on this. Don't get me wrong. Democrats are dumb enough to try because they weaponized politics. Funny to watch Democrats and their media when Biden is now on the hot seat. Everything Democrats tried against Trump is now starting to be used against Biden and they call foul. Funny as heck! What goes around comes around.
Trump has 3 different indictments and you think Biden is in the hot seat?! Haha you watch too much propaganda media that’s trying to use that as a distraction. In the real world there are real charges filed by our legal system against Trump. Law and order. The constitution… remember those things??
 
Trump has 3 different indictments and you think Biden is in the hot seat?! Haha you watch too much propaganda media that’s trying to use that as a distraction. In the real world there are real charges filed by our legal system against Trump. Law and order. The constitution… remember those things??
lantern2814 what’s fake about my statement? Explain yourself
 

Forum List

Back
Top